irishguy28

And yet they greedily slurp down the same concept when proferred on an AF spoon?

No-one should be under any illusions in this day and age. All European flights now offer the LCC concept [with few exceptions - AF not being one].

stimpy

Are you really saying the experience you get traveling with AF/KL as Platinum (or BA Gold, LH/LX Sen, etc) is the same as an LCC? If so, you are really missing something!

irishguy28

The part that actually matters - being transported from A to B - is almost indistinguishable.

Tomorrow I fly from AMS to DUB on Ryanair. No lounge access, but priority boarding, seat at the front, 1 free 20kg checked bag, and a high chance of arriving bang on time, all for the princely sum of €55 one way. I could instead have flown BA via LHR and "enjoyed" the Flounge again; or AFKL via CDG; or LH via FRA, at many multiples of this cost for a one-way ticket - but to what ends? To sit in mediocre lounges [I have status in all 3 alliances], waiting for mediocre flight experiences, a paltry number of miles (in the case of FB anyway!) and to waste several additional hours in the process?

No thanks!

stimpy

The part that actually matters is arriving at your destination on time. Right. I have a far better chance of getting that with a major than with Ryan air. As I wrote above, IRROPS is the number one reason I'd choose a major for a intra-Europe flight. It's not so much about the lounge.

Then there is getting to the airport. Most airports that majors use here have good train service. Not always so with Ryan Air.

warakorn

Why would you take a one-stop flight (over inconvenient CDG), if you have proper nonstop options at hand? I doubt U2 and EW are way more expensive than AF.

What is the point of your post?

irishguy28

But those supposed "advantages" - which, in many cases, simply do not apply - are lost when you choose a connecting itinerary operated by a legacy airline over a direct service operated by an LCC.

Germanwings flies TXL-NCE. Whether or not SXF is an "acceptable" substitute for TXL will become moot when the neighbouring BER closes both existing airports in a few years' time - but it is well connected to the public transport network, and U2 operates a direct SXF-NCE flight.

And you didn't get there on time in this instance. Plus, you had to allow for the extra time [and inconvenience] of having to make a connection. [That inconvenience is, in most cases, far greater than any hardship in travelling to a "remote" airport, though U2 always, and FR increasingly, uses "major" airports, so the argument is a little out of date. And anyways - sometimes flying to, say, Bergerac is preferable than flying to Bordeaux or Toulouse, for instance. Not everyone is always destined for the big metropolises ]

I simply don't understand your dislike of Easyjet.

stimpy

What advantage? The LCC cancels the flight and I have no recourse? How is that an advantage? THERE IS NO RECOURSE WHEN RYAN AIR SCREWS YOU OVER!!!! I can't repeat that enough. Good for you if you've never had a problem with them. But obviously people have problems all the time with that airline and most other LCC's. AF sometimes has problems, but I am always well taken care of when that happens. For the third time now, that is what really matters to me. And I think it matters to anyone who takes 100 flights per year.

Normally a connection at CDG is a breeze and rather enjoyable. This particular time it was not. I know the airport very well and like the lounges. LHR would be the same case if I didn't have to re-screen security while in transit. CDG does not do that, nor does AMS. But in any case when I can sit down in a lounge, have a drink, turn on my laptop and get some work done, etc., well I don't call that a chore at all. Maybe that is where we differ. But if you prefer Easyjet and Ryan Air, I will not try to deter you. If it works for you, then stick with it. I'm not sure why you are here in the AF forum trying to lure me away though.

THERE IS NO RECOURSE WHEN EASYJET SCREWS YOU OVER!!

papyPiHi

Second that, the only time my wife attempted to fly easyjet she got denied boarding, gate agent didn't allow them to rebook on another flight, and nothing could be done to recoup the cost of the ticket afterwards. U2 is on our private blacklist now

irishguy28

The fact that a quicker (and probably cheaper) flight is available, which even if badly delayed will still get you to your destination more quickly than taking an unnecessary connection in a hub affected by strikes almost every week these past few weeks.

Have you been screwed over by Ryanair?

The UK's Civil Aviation Authority ranked Ryanair as the airline with the least complaints in the UK last year. Air France ranked 17th with a rate of complaints over 4 times (133 per million passengers) that of Ryanair, in 37th place (30 per million passengers). Easyjet were 35th (42 per million passengers).

Fine, you will say that Ryanair has conditioned its passengers to expect the worst and not to complain. But you may have an outdated opinion of the LCCs.

You can clearly see that it is not that there is a bias against LCCs in the ranking - LCCs and charters hog the top spots - so it cannot be said that customers exhibit a reduced tendency to log a complaint when they are dealing with an LCC.

(Most Ryanair cancellations this year have been caused by French ATC strikes. Ditto for Easyjet)

I've flown a lot more with Air France than with Ryanair, but to date AF is the only airline that has ever misplace my luggage. On more than one occasion!

We see loads of "never flying them again!" posts all over the place, but actively adding hours to your travel time that will outweigh any possible delay to an LCC direct flight - not that I accept at all that LCCs are more prone to delays - is your prerogative, but one that seemingly has the potential to add hundreds of hours to your journey time, and thousands of Euro to your budget, over the course of your 100+ annual flights.

But to each their own!


Most flights - LCC or no - are a breeze.

No matter how enjoyable or straightforward a connection may be, to actively choose this over a direct flight on a past, unrepresentative experience seems a little OTT.

I'm not trying to lure you anywhere. I am just trying to understand why 2 flights are better than one! If you were mileage/status running I might understand. To have access to a lounge to work seems a little counterintuitive - the shorter flight counts as less disruption to your work. And with so many airports having free wifi - and cheap roaming data now a fact of life - any seat in any airport can now be as productive as a lounge.

Bakpapier

Untrue. Ryan Air actually has stellar on-time performance. I find percentages in the 90 percent compared to 70 percent with Air France. A good website consistently showing on-time statistics compared between ALL airlines (not just US ones) is still lacking, though.

And many LCCs fly to the major airports nowadays, or to airports that aren't actually farther than the large international airport (such as ORY, LGW, etc.)

But I'd highly encourage you to keep throwing away money on mainline so that we can continue to enjoy cheap flights on the LCCs.

The only reason I can think of to continue flying mainline within europe when LCC beats the product in virtually every single way is (1) acquiring frequent flyer miles and (2) lounge access. Re (1) you don't gain that many miles for your money on the short european routes compared to longhaul or other ways of gaining miles (credit cards for example) and re (2) is lounge access really so incredibly important? And if you have status you can enter the lounge anyway.

Bakpapier

Also Stimpy we are not trying to 'lure you away' or anything. We are trying to understand your reasons why you do as you do and so far I haven't seen a fulfilling explanation other than 'People Like Me Don't Fly Budget Airlines'. We're just trying to understand.

Being stuck in a location when a flight is cancelled can happen both on RyanAir and on AirFrance on outstations with infrequent flights. If there is only one flight per day you're gonna have to wait a day in the case of IRROPS, and you'll get the compensation that is due to you by European law, whether it was RyanAir or AirFrance. Ryan Air WILL rebook you on another carrier if that's cheaper for them than just paying your compensation. And if it's a destination with many AF flights but very little RyanAir flights, you could use your compensation to buy an AF ticket on the spot, right?

stimpy

OK, that's pure nonsense now. Were you or do you know anyone who was affected by a strike at CDG? I know people who were affected by LH strikes at FRA. There are loads of them on Flyertalk. But this same question was asked in this forum recently and it turned out that no one was badly affected by a flight cancellation or severe delay due to French strikes. Or arguable even mildly affected. The vast majority of AF flights were unaffected during the last few weeks.

That is a pretty poor statistic to go by. How about missed connections per pax? Oh wait, Ryan Air doesn't actually fly anywhere where you would need a connection. Another reason to avoid such statistics.

BA is the worst for me by far with luggage, but again a meaningless stat.

I see you didn't read or comprehend my post, but again it is not a chore or wasted time. If you are thinking in terms only of journey time, you are missing the plot. I'm sitting in a comfortable space, doing my work. That does not count as journey time, nor wasted time, nor unpleasant time. It's just what I do. As I fly globally I often do not have a choice with connections. But even when I do have a choice, I think it would be a poor one to use an a direct LCC flight over a connection with a major. IMHO of course. Again, if it works for you, then go for it.

Well you are arguing that my point of view is invalid or incorrect. And of course I disagree with you. I've been doing this for a very long time and I know what works best for me. And it is intuitive when you consider ALL factors. It's clear we disagree about time spent in a lounge. Maybe you aren't able to get work done in lounges or don't like them for some reason, but they are absolutely an important and regular workplace for me.

stimpy

EU Compensation? That's a joke. For me BA is the worst violator of this reg probably because they are very large and have policies of just lying about the cause of the delay and blaming on ATC or whatever. So, no compensation. Of course I have no direct knowledge of Ryan Air or Easyjet, but I've read enough posts here (right in this thread!) and elsewhere to know that people don't seem to get compensated with those airlines either. Whereas AF has always covered me and even gone the extra mile (pun ) to hand out extra miles to when they are at fault. I and many others have reported on that here in this forum.

irishguy28

Nonsense?


But that's completely missing the point, stimpy.

One completely avoids the risk of "missed connections" by booking direct flights, where available. It will not always be possible to take a direct flight on every routing, of course. But it usually makes more sense to take the direct route where it is offered!

Plus, with only one flight necessary, your exposure to the risk of a delay is minimized (with an indirect flight, you have two - or more! - chances of being delayed!)

By flying TXL-CDG-NCE you forewent two better flights, TXL-NCE on Eurowings (which, last Friday, was 30 minutes delayed) and SXF-NCE on Easyjet (which, last Friday, arrived early) and which didn't require any long layover at CDG running around looking for lounges and which would have got you to your home/office/hotel much faster. No matter how well you work in an AF lounge, I am sure you work better at your origin and your destination, so cutting down travel time should be better all around.

I don't travel for work, so I'm not being paid to fly suboptimum routes; and while I will take indirect routes when travelling long haul (I'm repositioning to DUB tomorrow to take another indirect TATL in J) because it often makes sense, particularly for reducing the cost, I see absolutely no benefit in wasting time on indirect flights in Europe, unless there is an overwhelming factor in favour of doing so, such as there being no direct flight, or the indirect flight being somehow better timed or much cheaper (and they rarely are).

It does. It allows my travel budget to go further and it gives me more time at my destination or means I need to take less time off work.

I don't work in lounges - the type of work I do isn't the type of work that can be "phoned in" - though it can be handy "down time" to scan emails or do all the less important housekeeping tasks.

But again, the lounge time can be cut down, and the flying time can be cut down, by taking a direct flight where available.

I see you are married to the idea of sticking with a brand you obviously like (despite the mini-rant in your OP) but I feel your aversion to Easyjet, et al, is evidence of a blind spot when it comes to risk assessment. Easyjet et al are no more likely to "screw you over" than any other airline (and, in fact, actually make it easier to change your ticket and travel earlier/later if your work plans change) than some other airlines. And delays can happen to the best airlines. To determinedly always walk away from a quicker option is, in fact, costing you time and money far in excess of the catastrophic meltdown that probably would never happen on this flight.

stimpy

Yes nonsense. CDG has about a half a million flights per year. 300 cancellations is a rounding error at an airport that size. Plus that stat isn't just for CDG is it? If there were 50,000 cancellations at CDG caused by this year's French strike, then we'd be at 10% and we'd have a lot more people complaining here. But that didn't happen.

As for the rest, you and I have rather different reasons for travel so it's natural that we would prefer different modes of travel. I'm quite happy overall with AF, KL, LH, LX and even with the hell that is LHR, BA. When I have tried LCC's as noted above, it has not been a happy experience.